But... But everyone having a right to medical care whether they're rich or poor? Unthinkable! Think of the shareholders!

Ew, I can feel myself getting healthier just parsing the word "u****l ar*". You need to censor more of that.

I doubt that this vaccine will be covered by European health insurance providers if it costs a lot.

Which is why the Moderna vaccine will be priced at just 95% of the cost of the repeat treatments and hospitalization plus the value of the time saved and pain and suffering avoidance by the patient. Say, an extra half a million. I mean, what price would you put on avoiding seeing your parent or child subjected to round after round of chemotherapy?

but sequencing and gene alteration is way cheaper than in[sic] needs to be.

...what? this sounds like you're advocating for price increases.

It's not better, ideally the body finds and eliminates cancer cells all by itself. Just like it does with viruses or infection. It happens all the time, most of the time you'd never know it happened

What this does is hardcore the "solution" into your immune cells. It tells them exactly what antibody to build, and spams that knowledge, so your immune cells are loaded up and ready to use that antibody

I think "reasonable" is doing a lot of heavy lifting here. Whatever price they charge it will be to maximize to Moderna's profits - i.e. they'll price it slightly lower than what insurers / national health systems would be stung for what 44% of melanoma patients needing a second round of expensive chemo would cost them but not so high that no one will cover the treatment. So I guess the price is "reasonable", in that it'll be cheaper than the alternative but it's not like Moderna will be charitable or fair about it.

It's still an amazing breakthrough though.

Multifactor analysis still requires an underlying commonality. People taking multiple drugs are all still taking the drug being trialed. You're removing the confounding factors. If every treatment is a unique cancer protein there is no common factor. The treatment is the confounding factor.

To put it another way. A safety trial has to prove that any protein administered is safe.

Edit: just realised you're probably talking about efficacy trials, whereas I'm more concerned with safety.

I worked for one the first hospitals that was doing genomic testing for oncology patients in the U.S. I am not advocating against genomic testing or precision medicine, but Amerisource Bergen, (at the time) McKesson, and the sales people at the manufacturer were licking their chops at the thought of precision medicine. It was extremely lucrative for some improvements on QoL. I sincerely hope that it’s not cost prohibitive to patients and results in breakthroughs in treatment. But I did watch as a lung cancer drug was administered to patients at the cost of 250k per treatment. I don’t remember how many treatments there were but the cost was insane. The US system of healthcare is absolutely broken and I believe there’s a study that particularly evaluated cancer as a major cause of families depleting whatever savings they had within a couple years of being diagnosed. This is an indictment of the whole system. Not the efficacy of the drugs.

Most modern cancer drug treatment is sequenced to at least the specific proteins of the type of cancer it is.

Have breast cancer? Cool. We figure out which of the many variations so that we can give you medications for that exact type of breast cancer.

This sort of specific targeting has been increasing and increasing for the last 20 years. MRNA is the next step of that and is highly likely to be a means or become or for treatments in many other areas.

Mhmm, sins of the parents pass down and all that. That's sky daddy justice right thurr.

So much for "Whatever you did for the least among you, you did also for me". Remember they now say that the Sermon on the Mount is too liberal. They don't agree with Jesus's message because they have people they don't like. They have enemies they want to hurt.

I don't believe in welfare!

You and the person above you are confusing communism with socialism

Not the most profitable... The least expensive, long term. The most profitable would be the cheapest option but the most possible tax is collected. The whole point is to reduce burden on the tax payers, not maximize tax revenue.

True, except the US doesn't even do that. It's your fault for getting cancer, so you pay yourself. :))

Lol everywhere. Ever been outside your country?

Right, we certainly can't have more than one factor.

could have been an attempt at irony

A bit oversimplified but generally true for persistent bummed out. Not true for acute suicideation, which is real, a threat, and can be resolved with drugs or listening to the suicide call.

It's coming! I'm confident in my lifetime they'll have it solved. They're actually working on an "anti-vaccine" that corrects celiac/diabetes. I'm also interested because I have 1 celiac and 1 diabetes. Celiac sucks.

It seems like a mix. Part from organ damage, part from misbehaving immune response in some people

I just found a paper in trying to figure this out, but it seems like the author of this study wasn't really looking at it as an autoimmune disease, but a post-viral syndrome like Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (ME/CFS) which is partially immunological, but not autoimmune. ME/CFS has been known about a lot longer than long COVID, and seems to be better (if not yet well) understood.

Reading though a lot of the sites with information on ME/CFS, it makes intuitive sense that long COVID has more in common with it than something like rheumatoid arthritis. I hope that long COVID brings attention to ME/CFS, or in studying similar diseases we're able to learn more about their common causes/treatments, or generally understand both better.

COVID is a virus, so not an autoimmune illness. Long COVID might be partly autoimmune

All I heard overpandemic was that COVID was triggering diabetes in people which makes sense because we don't know what triggers diabetes but one of the theories is it's caused by viral stress.

I bet any money they will one day find a genetic mutation like the one in BRCA2 that causes cancer.

Speaking of cancer...

Across a publicly funded network with technology originally paid for by the public.

/jk right? Right???

Capitalism is why we have ruined the environment.

Yes, no innovation has been done under any system but capitalism. /s Let's forget about how totalitarian Russia was the first to space. Let's forget about how much medicine was developed under the religious authoritarianism of ancient Arabia. Let's forget about how much philosophy was conceived under feudalism.

Capitalism is the reason third generation morons have multiple private jets.

Capitalism =/= money.

I'm sure leaving reddit was a good idea, but joining lemmy might not have been. People here are just delusional in their approach to reality.

Did you really think these new vaccine will be affordable? Those nice things are for the rich.

It wouldn’t exist at all if capitalism didn’t exist.

Science doesn't need capitalism to exist. Technology doesn't need to be for-profit to be developed.

I know it sounds awful, but I've had family members die of cancer in the US and Europe, and 10k for a cure wouid have been a bargain in either case.

And hopefully with time the price will come down.

If this truly works, it'll be one of those things that cheaper for society to pay for than letting the disease drag on and fighting it with our old methods.

Right? Bunch of morons who never had cancer, or never knew anyone who was diagnosed and treated for cancer, thinking a 10k treatment is expensive.

Communism Stan's be Stanning

Do drugs other than betel nuts grow on trees in your country?

Dying from cancer is also sad. Chemo is also sad. Who wins? Find out tonight at 8pm

There is a common misconception that long term effects will manifest long after the injection. All vaccines with longterm effects manifested their effect shortly after the injection. It makes little sense that you will have adverse reactions months or years later because the compounds are long gone from your system.

There are lots of things that do damage that isn't necessarily obvious in the short term, especially if you don't know exactly what that damage might look like. There's a reason I said we probably made a good bet with mRNA vaccines for COVID, the odds that they've done some kind of damage that isn't immediately apparent and we'll see an uptick in some problem or another a few years down the line in vaccinated people is very low but not zero. If the risk of this vaccine damaging patients in some fashion that wasn't apparent within the duration of trials was zero, rather than merely low there would be no reason to make the manufacturers immune to liability from damages caused as a consequence.

On the upside, we conveniently have a large population who have decided to be the control group for mRNA COVID vaccines out of political spite so we have a large sample to compare long term outcomes between.

The other half becomes vampires, obviously.

Everyone dies

Capital zombies. I don't think I've seen that movie done....

Surelly at least the food problem and the bodies problem can be solved at the same time by resorting to cannibalism?!

With a bit of luck the vaxxed would drop dead in early Winter, which would help preserve the meat longer.

What's the proportion of the overweight in Canada? I'm thinking maybe the energy problem too can be solved with a proper use of all that fat.

I'm curious what cost figure they're using here because the cost seems odd for Canada. I used to work at a pharmacy and insulin is fully covered by public drug plans (there absolutely needs to be a federally public drug plan), I'm thinking of plans like Trillium in Ontario where you pay a deductible based on yearly income. Employer private insurance to my knowledge would cover it to $0, but possibly not the dispensing fee, which is VERY close to the amount listed here. If they are talking just raw cost per vial with no coverage then that's possibly accurate, it's just very rare to actually see that at the register at a pharmacy.

In general I like comparing the US and Canada healthcare regimes because we are pretty much linked to their economy, however seeing where our healthcare over/under performs vs the US you can really link to the differences in the way healthcare is implemented. Broadly speaking we have comparable outcomes, with US and Canada having areas of specialty, however the cost spent by the US on healthcare per capita is insanely higher. People will pad this by claiming that money is because of healthcare research in the US which "the world benefits from at our cost" but the figures aren't often added together in that way. It really is the delivery of healthcare in the US where there are insane costs compared to every other G20 country with detailed healthcare data.

Thank you for the kind reaction.

I recently moved from Reddit to Lemmy (same username) and I took my comments with me.

Agreed. And I was happy the comment didn't end with, "in 1998, Hell in a Cell...".

They have to manufacture it unique to the individual. Luckily, manufacturing custom mRNA is not very expensive.

In general, mutations can happen anywhere on any gene, so every patient's cancer will have its unique signature of mutations. However, like in the evolution of organisms by natural selection, most random mutations will have a detrimental effect and the cells carrying it will die. Some of the mutations will be neutral and despite the change in the amino acid, the cells harbouring it won't survive better or worse than cells that don't have it. But a few mutations will make the cancer cells proliferate faster or evade the immune system better, which will lead to these cells surviving and ultimately overtaking the population of the cancer cells. The latter mutations often happen in the same places on the same genes, and in melanoma for example, in as many as 41% of cases the 600th amino acid in a protein called BRAF mutates from valine to alanine (so the code for that mutation is "BRAF V600E"), and BRAF is only one example of such genes that commonly mutate in the same position.

So to answer your question - I don't know Moderna's exact protocol, but my guess is that the tailored vaccine will contain a mixture of these commonly occurring mutations and some mutations that are unique to the patient.

I think the first point to make is that this is not really the patient's own genetic information, but that of their cancer, something they desperately want to get rid of. And the second point is that to my knowledge, there is no county on earth, where taking part in a clinical trial would not require the patient's consent, which is to say, all people in the study were informed that the genetic sequences of their cancers will be analysed and used to generate a vaccine.

As for the potential to become a weapon, you would have to elaborate, because I really don't see how the Moderna vaccine strategy could be weaponised.

Full of cold I sremoveded way too hard at that and 3 years of shnots came out. Cheers for the laugh and clear out. Happy new year

Godammit lemmy. Can’t we even enjoy a fucking cancer cure for a few minutes before the communist ranting begins?

and is the general cause of your body breaking down

This is the step where a heavy [citation needed] comes along. There are a lot of complex processes involved in aging, we have no idea if simply "make the telomeres longer!" is going to solve all of that. Frankly it seems unlikely that that's all there is to it.

Don't get me wrong, I'm an optimist when it comes to longevity research. I think aging is a problem that will eventually be solved. But there's not going to be just one "cure for aging", there's a lot of things that go wrong over time and we're probably going to have to find ways to fix each of them as they come along.

The only difference between an RNA vaccine and an old DNA vaccine is that the DNA vaccine is less efficient, more indirect, and makes you a little bit sick.